Rita Valda Bambers

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought various supplementary medical, rehabilitation, and housekeeping benefits after the insurer terminated weekly benefits.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had a significant pre-accident history of chronic pain and had largely recovered from the accident-related soft tissue injuries by December 1995.

Most of the claimed expenses, including physiotherapy, massage therapy, and trips to India, were denied for lack of evidence connecting them to the accident.

However, the arbitrator allowed expenses for a dental bite plane and related travel, finding they were reasonably incurred for a temporomandibular joint impairment caused by the accident.

The appellant appealed an arbitration order finding that the insurer was not required to pay him further income replacement benefits because he was knowingly operating an uninsured motor vehicle at the time of the accident.

The appellant sought to introduce fresh evidence and raise a new waiver argument on appeal.

The Director's Delegate admitted part of the fresh evidence but refused the waiver argument.

On the merits, the Director's Delegate upheld the arbitrator's findings that the vehicle's coverage had been deleted at the spouse's request, that the appellant knew of the deletion, and that the insurer was not estopped from denying coverage.

The appeal was dismissed.

The insurer requested that two separate arbitrations involving the same applicant but different motor vehicle accidents be combined into a single hearing.

The applicant, who was self-represented, objected to the consolidation.

The arbitrator determined that under section 9.1(4) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, proceedings cannot be combined without the consent of the parties unless another Act or regulation explicitly allows it.

The arbitrator found that the general rule-making authority under section 21 of the Insurance Act and Rule 30 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code were insufficient to override the SPPA's consent requirement.

Consequently, the insurer's request to combine the arbitrations was denied.